A Giant Has Passed

Writer, author, and Christian teacher Dallas Williard has passed away today from cancer. Williard was well known for his books that most frequently dealt with spiritual disciplines and spiritual formation. He was a true giant of the faith. I now offer up this prayer:

Eternal Lord God, you hold all souls in life: Give to your whole Church in paradise and on earth your light and your peace; and grant that we, following the good example of Dallas Williard and of others who have served you here and are now at rest, may at the last enter with them into your unending joy; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with you, in the unity of the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever. Amen.

Fallacy Friday: Appeal to Probability

"Appealing to Probability is a logical fallacy where one assumes that a thing is inevitable simply because it is possible. Probability can be useful to find out the likelihood of future events, probability is not a fallacy in itself. Appeal to Probability is a fallacy because it is used to assume an absolute." - Professor Logic

I'm sure many of you can recall a conversation you've had (probably with your mother) in which you've planned out a detailed a trip or expressed a desire, just to have them appeal to probability as if it were an open and shut case against you. It is such a common fallacy to see committed. Take the possible exchange below:

Me: "Honey, we should visit Asia sometime. I hear it has some beautiful landmarks."
Wife: "No, we'll catch the bird flu."

Is it necessarily true that we'll catch the bird flu? No! It is possible? Sure. The fact that the bird flu is common there and originated in Asia (I believe) does not entail the fact that we will catch it.

Now its important to note that the Appeal to Probability fallacy is a non sequitur (Latin = "it does not follow"). This category of fallacies is called such because their purported conclusions do not follow from their stated premises. The conclusion is not necessarily false, but the logic used to arrive there is inadequate.

The ultimate problem with the AtoP fallacy is that it confuses "possible/probable" with "will." It states that something merely possible is absolute.

To wrap up let's look at it this way:

A: Something can go wrong (premise)
B: Therefore, something will go wrong (invalid conclusion)

However, what if we were to add on step?

A: Anything that can go wrong will go wrong (premise 1)
B: Something can go wrong (premise 2)
C: Something will go wrong (valid conclusion)

Now you may object by saying that we cannot prove premise 1, and you might be on to something. Premise 1 is an a priori (Latin = "from the earlier") statement. That literally means that we hold it to be true without any need to test its truthfulness. You may object to its truthfulness, and that is philosophically fair play; however, the logic of the aforementioned structure is what we care about. So, is it logical? Yes. If P1 is true and P2 is true, then C is a valid conclusion. The syllogistic structure is coherent and accurate. Now, whether or not the independent P's are true is a debate for another day.

So, why does all of this matter? When it comes to this fallacy I hope the answer is obvious. It is never logical to assume something will be the case simply because it has the possibility (be it high or low) to be the case. Possibility is something useful in science, mathematics, and philosophy, so don't hear me saying that it ought to be done away with or ignored. On the contrary, Possibility is helpful in determining trends, making scientific hypotheses, etc. The fallacy occurs when we make the possible the absolute. That which could be is not equal with that which will be.

Thanks for reading and remember to keep thinking!

Fallacy Friday: Intro

I'm inaugurating a new series on my blog that will appear every Friday. Its called "Fallacy Friday." Each Friday I will post a new logical fallacy. The purpose of doing so is three-fold. First, I want my readers to be able to better understand how to employ logic and rhetoric in an appropriate way. We all can improve our argumentation skills. Second, it is important to be able to spot such errors when they occur so one is not held hostage to poor logic in conversation or debate. Third, I want us all to become better thinkers. When one is able to logically present an argument to another, one's case is (naturally) strengthened. And who doesn't want to think correctly, too?

Today, I want to briefly introduce us to the world of logical fallacies. So, what is a logical fallacy? Well, according to Purdue University's English department:

[Logical] fallacies are common errors in reasoning that will undermine the logic of your argument. Fallacies can be either illegitimate arguments or irrelevant points, and are often identified because they lack evidence that supports their claim.

Now its important to point out that the use of logical fallacies does not necessarily entail that your argument is false; they merely result in a lack of "soundness" in your argument.

We will begin by looking at formal logical fallacies and then move onto informal logical fallacies. A formal fallacy is one that results from a flaw in the logical structure of one's argument, thereby invalidating one's argument. An informal fallacy is one in which the stated premises fails to support the proposed solution.

Its important to point out that there are many ways to classify fallacies. I've chosen to simply label them formal and informal, but some may like to know that others classify fallacies by there type of reasoning (inductive and deductive fallacies). There are even what some deem as factual fallacies, in which the argument being made includes incorrect data. However, I will stick with the basics.

I look forward to sharing this information with you all as we journey become better thinkers, writers, readers, and all around smarter people!

Note: I will be getting much of my information from Wikipedia, as well as various institutions of higher learning.

Check out the Koinonia Blog's Weekly Giveaway!

http://www.koinoniablog.net/2012/10/wednesday-giveaway-prepositions-and-theology-in-the-greek-new-testament.html